Dear Rev Peter Ng 

Greetings in the Blessed Name of our LORD Jesus Christ, the soon coming King. 

1                    On all the occasions that I heard of JSM and of your good work, I have been greatly impressed by your love and defence of God’s Truth. I have known of the fundamentalist and separatist stance held by you as the minister and the members of JSM. I thank God for that. Your biblical witness, I believe, is widely acknowledged in Christian circles. Personally, I have seen you in action during the Ralph Colas’ seminar held in Calvary Pandan. 

2                    I am a member of Calvary Pandan BPC and my family has been with this community of faith for almost 5 years. We left our previous church of 16 years because of its Neo-evangelical stance and the pastor became ecumenistic and liberal. The pastor was trained in Fuller Theological Seminary and he imbibes the erroneous position of Limited Inerrancy of the Scripture. Basically he believes and teaches that the bible has errors and he has been very tolerant with errors.   

3                    I write to you in my personal capacity as a child of God concerned for the Church of Jesus Christ. The LORD laid upon my heart to share my concerns with you. The assumptions that I make here are that you are aware of: (a) the VPP issue in Life BPC , (b) what Mr Lim Seng Hoo has done in Calvary Pandan in response to the sermon preached by Dr Jeffrey Khoo on 10072005, and (c) how the 2 pastors of Pandan decisively took Mr Lim to task both for his wrong action and his infamous attack that our Holy Scriptures have errors. (d) the fact that Mr Lim has not yet repented of his wrong, but instead threatened to sue them in court. (e) Mr Lim’s incessant calls for a public debate with Dr Jeffrey over his Errant Bible issue, and even threatened to do that in the secular court. That, he claimed that he is doing not for his name but for the honour of God’s name. (f) his accusation that those who hold VPP position (Rev Tow, Dr Jeffrey Khoo, Dr Tow, Dr Quek) are erroneous and divisive and the latter two are the cause of the split in Life BPC.  

4                    I understand that Mr Lim received invitations to speak on his defence of an Errant Scripture, and that included JSM (05092004). I was informed by a sister, a Calvarian who attended your recent JSM/BJU meeting held in Life BPC in June 2005, that Mr Lim’s article “An Evidential Review of the VPP Theory” which attacks the Perfectly Preserved Scripture, was distributed. It is my guess that your good self ( I hope I am wrong) might have been persuaded over to a non-VPP position and am a keen supporter for the public debate. 

5                    I humbly submit to you that such a debate is unnecessary. Both views have been thoroughly debated in the books written by the respective camps. A child of God needs only to get hold of these books and articles and study their arguments carefully with the help of the Scriptures and of the Holy Spirit. Mr Lim and the 2 Lifer pastors have disseminated their arguments in many of their writings, so have Dr Jeffrey, Dr Quek and FEBC faculty members who been publishing numerous articles in defense of the PERFECTLY PRESERVED BIBLE. I perceive Mr Lim’s appetite for big audiences in this respect. 

6                    Any debate on Christian doctrines and practices would require both parties to appeal to the final authority of the Christian faith, the infallible and inerrant  Bible. The sword of the Spirit is the inerrant Bible (MT/TR-KJB) in our hands. The refusal of any party to adhere to this appeal would render the debate impossible. You can try doing that with the Modernists, Roman Catholics, Jehovah Witnesses, Mormons and the Muslims, whose final authority is not the inerrant Bible, but their own traditions, words of fallible men and their  reasoning faculties (conjecture). If one denies the doctrine of perfect preservation of Holy Scriptures and its accessibility to us (Mr Lim’s position), then his final authority is a combination of his fallible and errant bible in his hand and his own reasoning faculty. Hence, his defence of non-VPP position is weak and precarious because his errant Bible (his sword) is uncertain and his reasoning is fallible. His method of argument is man-centered and based on human rationalism. Is it not right and God honouring that we should instead argue any Christian doctrine, including Bible inspiration and preservation, based on His perfect preserved and sure Word  available in our hands? 

7                    The Scripture is replete with verses supporting the doctrine of VPP.(Ps 12:6,7; Ps 19:7, Ps33:11, Ps 119:89, Matt 5:18, Mk 13:31, Isa 40:8).  I cannot find a single verse supporting the theory of non-VPP. If that is so, why would a fundamentalist hold such an unbiblical non-VPP position. That being so, such a position is more rationalistic than  fundamental. A non-VPPist would try very hard to re-interprete the proof-texts that support a VPP position to make them say otherwise. They would hit hard at the Masoretic Text(OT) and Received Text(NT) and the faithful English translation KJB by pointing out the “errors” and “discrepancies” in them. It is because, in a non-VPPist’s mind these are real errors.  

8                    This debate is basically on the issue of FAITH in GOD’s WORD.(Heb 11:1, Heb 11:6) Do I believe what God says of His Word in its inspiration as well as its preservation? It is due to (a) the lack of faith on His WORD, which leads to  (b) the rejection of the Scriptural support for the Doctrine of VPP, and to (c) the affirmation of real errors, that will finally bring one to (d) the unbiblical position of non-VPP. Is that honouring God or is it  honouring man? 

9                    Are we on God’s side? If an unprecedented open debate becomes a reality and if that event is made known to the Muslims, who do you think they will embrace and cheer for at the end of it? Mr Lim Seng Hoo, of course! It is no surprise that they would jeer at Dr Jeffrey Khoo. Why? Because it will be a chance for the Muslims to confirm that we Christians admit that our Bible has errors.  It is unthinkable for any Muslim to say, let alone debate among themselves that their Holy Book has errors, for this is outright blasphemy!  If you go to the website and type “Contradictions in the Bible”, you will find that many of these websites are from Muslims and atheists. They are aware that the foundation of the Christian faith is the Bible in our hands, and  if they can find errors in the bible, even one error regardless of its doctrinal significance, the foundation crumbles. Are fundamentalists today fighting on the correct side of the battle?  Are we doing God a favour by defending a non-VPP position and by attacking the MT/TR/KJB, saying that the Bible in our hands has errors, or are we supporting the wrong camp? Who is on the LORD’s side? The VPPist or the nonVPPist ?  

10                What are the consequences of a non-VPP position? In medicine, when a new drug is tested before it is being used, the doctors will have to analyze objectively the end-points of the 2 groups of patients on trial. What are the end-points of the VPP and the Non-VPP positions? The endpoints are diametrically opposite! VPP : (a) God’s Name exalted (b) Faith of the saints strengthened (c) Man abased . Non-VPP: (a) God’s name dishonoured and His promises doubted (b) Faith of the saints weakened and shaken (c) Man honoured. 

11                Modernists believe the Bible contains many errors and Neo-evangelicals believe that it has some errors, now more and more Fundamentalists begin to say that there are few errors. But all are the same, because all these believe that the Bible in our hands has errors. 

12                In conclusion, it is my heart’s desire that you carefully consider and pray over this issue which is of utmost importance. May God grant us the strength and discernment to go against the tide of the Non-VPP position. 

SOLA SCRIPTURA

GOD BLESS 

Han Whie Kwang

A member of Calvary PandanBPC

01082005